Cost-effectiveness of new adult pneumococcal vaccination strategies in Italy.

Department of Public Health
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics (Impact Factor: 3.64). 01/2013; 9(3). DOI: 10.4161/hv.23268
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) are very relevant pathologies among elderly people (≥ 65 y old), with a consequent high disease burden. Immunization with the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) has been differently implemented in the Italian regions in the past years, reaching overall low coverage rates even in those with medical indications. In 2010, the 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) became available and recommended in the universal Italian infant immunization program. Since October 2012, indications for use of PCV13 were extended to subjects ≥ 50 y to prevent invasive pneumococcal diseases. The Italian decision makers should now revise regional indications for the prevention of pneumococcal diseases in the elderly. Pharmaco-economic analyses represent a useful tool to value the feasibility of new immunization programs and their sustainability. Therefore, an ad hoc population model was developed in order to value the clinical and economic impact of an adult pneumococcal vaccination program in Italy. Particularly, different immunization scenarios were modeled: vaccination of 65 y-olds (1 cohort strategy), simultaneous vaccination of people aged 65 and 70 y (double cohort strategy) and, lastly, immunization of people aged 65, 70 and 75 y (triple cohort strategy), thus leading to the vaccination of 5, 10 and 15 cohorts during the 5 y of the program. In addition, the administration of a PPV23 dose one year after PCV13 was evaluated, in order to verify the economic impact of the supplemental serotype coverage in elderly people. The mathematical model valued the clinical impact of PCV13 vaccination on the number of bacteraemic pneumococcal pneumonia and pneumococcal meningitis cases, and related hospitalisations and deaths. Although PCV13 is not yet formally indicated for the prevention of pneumococcal CAP by the European Medicine Agency (differently from FDA, whose indications include all pneumococcal diseases in subjects ≥ 50 y), the model calculated also the possible impact of vaccination on CAP cases (non-bacteraemic), considering the rate of this disease due to S.pneumoniae. The results of the analysis show that, in Italy, an age-based PCV13 vaccination program in elderly people is cost-effective from the payer perspective, with costs per QALY ranging from 17,000 to 22,000 Euro, according to the adopted vaccination strategy. The subsequent PPV23 offer results in an increment of costs per QALY (from 21,000 to 28,000 Euro, according to the vaccination strategy adopted). Pneumococcal vaccination using the conjugate vaccine turned out to be already favorable in the second year of implementation, with incremental costs per QALY comparable to those of other already adopted prevention activities in Italy (for instance, universal HPV vaccination of 12 y-old girls), with further benefits obtained when extending the study period beyond the 5-y horizon of our analysis.

1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The global burden of pneumococcal diseases is high, with young children and adults ≥50 years of age at highest risk of infection. Two types of vaccine are available for the prevention of pneumococcal diseases caused by specific Streptococcus pneumoniae serotypes: the pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPV23) and the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7, PCV10, and PCV13). Despite pneumococcal immunization programs in adults and children, the burden in adults has remained high. Most European countries have national or local/regional vaccination recommendations. The objective of this review was to provide an overview of the government recommendations for pneumococcal vaccination outside routine childhood vaccination programs for 16 Western European countries as of August 2014. We found that recommendations for pneumococcal immunization across Europe are complex and vary greatly among countries in terms of age groups and risk groups recommended for vaccination, as well as which vaccine should be administered. Clarifying or simplifying these recommendations and improving their dissemination could help to increase pneumococcal vaccine uptake and decrease the high burden of pneumococcal diseases in adults, both through a direct effect of the vaccine and via a herd effect in unvaccinated individuals. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-014-0157-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
    Advances in Therapy 10/2014; 31(10). DOI:10.1007/s12325-014-0157-1 · 2.44 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Vaccination is traditionally considered as a measure addressed to infants and children. Indeed, in natural conditions, vaccine-preventable infections are mainly spread at a young age. The implementation of routine and mass vaccination programmes has led to the eradication of smallpox and to the elimination of poliomyelitis in many regions of the world, together with the control of once life-threatening diseases like diphtheria and tetanus. In more recent times, the development of new generation vaccines and the changing epidemiological profile of many vaccine-preventable diseases have greatly changed the objectives and the target of today's immunization strategies. The objective of this article is to highlight and discuss the evolution of vaccination strategies from measures aimed at protecting children to a practice that is needed throughout life. Adolescents and adults need immunization for several reasons: they may not have received the vaccines usually administered in childhood; new vaccines tailored for adolescents and adults have become available; immunity acquired thanks to immunization in childhood can fade; and older adults or those who are chronically ill are more susceptible to vaccine-preventable diseases and to their complications. The changing demographic profile of both industrialized countries and of countries in transition towards an 'aging' population, and the shift of several infectious diseases towards adulthood make it imperative that new infrastructures to deliver vaccines and new investments in immunization are investigated. Such a change of perspective is needed both to preserve health and to guarantee the sustainability of health systems.
    Clinical Microbiology and Infection 05/2014; 20 Suppl 5:32-6. DOI:10.1111/1469-0691.12537 · 5.20 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Individuals <2 years and ≥50 years of age, as well as those with other specific risk factors, are especially vulnerable to invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD). Conjugate vaccines have been developed against encapsulated bacteria such as Streptococcus pneumoniae to provide improved immune responses. The 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV7) has significantly reduced the burden of vaccine-type pneumococcal diseases in children, including invasive disease and pneumonia and acute otitis media. There have also been significant declines in antimicrobial resistance in 7-valent vaccine serotypes and carriage of S. pneumoniae in the post-PCV7 era. Two to three years after the introduction of PCV13, there is emerging, global evidence of a reduced burden of pneumococcal diseases in children, including declines in IPD (UK and Germany) and nasopharyngeal carriage of PCV13 serotypes (Portugal and France). The functional immunogenicity of PCV13 in individuals ≥50 years of age has been demonstrated in clinical trials in comparison with the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine and for children and adults 6 to 49 years of age. Between 2011 and 2013, PCV13 received market authorisation by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for these additional age groups and is now available in Europe for the prevention of pneumococcal disease in all age groups.
    European Journal of Clinical Microbiology 08/2014; 34(1). DOI:10.1007/s10096-014-2208-6 · 2.54 Impact Factor